Questions such as this must not rely on asking for help in creating an actual argument for the person asking. We are not here to further the person's political/religious/personal goals, we are here to help people improve their interpersonal skills.
So, I'd like to pull out an old and much used question here, the vegan question.
How to ask a vegan to stop telling me about veganism because I am not interested in it?
This question isn't asking us to make an argument for why veganism is bad or why the OP isn't going to be a vegan, it's asking how to get the vegans to stop pestering the OP when they are eating a non-vegan lunch.
This, is fine. As Hamlet, I think, would say, what sets the vegan question apart from the one this question is about is that it's specific about the situation. It's about coworkers who are regularly approaching the OP about his eating habits.
The question at hand isn't about any specific person. It could be about a journalist (but would that be IPS if you never talk with them in person?) or a friend/coworker/family member... which would be an IPS issue.
But I'd like to introduce a rule that I think we should consider. We are not here to be copy editors. We are not here to redraft emails, write speeches, tell you what to say. We're here to help people determine for themselves the best way to phrase something; to give advice for researching how to find the arguments you need. We're not here to come up with the argument or to put words in mouths.
If the goal of a question is "tell me what to say" or "re/write my email for me" - we should not answer these questions. These are the equivalent of the Stack Overflow "Give me teh codez" questions.
So, as is, the question is unclear and if the OP really just wants us to draft their argument for them, it should stay closed, but closed as "off topic".